Guest guest Posted September 30, 2002 Report Share Posted September 30, 2002 > Someone who thinks he " knows. " > > And, what could be sillier than that? Dan, Your comment reminds me of Wei Wu Wei. Have you heard of him? His books have long been out of print (like 30 years). Any way, it struck me that you might like his writing, so I pulled out an old volume. Here's a pretty random sample: Objective existence is phenomenal -- appearance only, Non-objective existence is unaware of existing, And it is phenomenally incognisable. Objective existence is figuration in mind, Non-objective existence only 'exists' as such mind, Cognising everything except what is cognising. Objective mind is self-elaboration in space-time, Non-objective mind, phenomenally void, knows neither. By whom is this being said? By mind atempting to see itself -- and not succeeding. Why? As space-time 'it' appears as 'void', Intemporally 'it' cannot cognise what is cognising. -- Wei Wu Wei Posthumous Pieces -Bill > > dan330033 [dan330033] > Monday, September 30, 2002 6:20 AM > Nisargadatta > Re: Digest Number 639 > > > > :-) > > -- Dan > > > Nisargadatta, " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > > " Who " is to judge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.